IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 15 August 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130003351
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests promotion reconsideration by a Special Selection Board (SSB) under the criteria used by the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, Colonel, Judge Advocate General (JAG) Promotion Selection Board.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that when his promotion file was considered by the FY 2011, Colonel, JAG Promotion Selection Board it did not contain the back page of his DA Form 67-8 (U.S. Army Officer Evaluation Report (OER)) for the period ending 1 November 1996. He goes on to state that he requested reconsideration through the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) and his request was denied because the age of the OER did not meet the minimum criteria to warrant SSB promotion consideration which he finds to be arbitrary, unjust, and not published.
3. The applicant provides a four-page memorandum to the Board explaining his application, copies of emails between the applicant and HRC regarding his promotion file, a list of documents he contends made up his promotion file, his request for reconsideration by an SSB, and a copy of the OER in question.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant was commissioned as a U.S. Army Reserve second lieutenant on 11 May 1990. He was ordered to active duty on 3 October 1993 and was promoted to the rank of major in the Regular Army on 1 June 2001. He was promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel in the JAG Corps on 1 July 2006.
2. On 15 February 2012, officials from the HRC Promotions Branch dispatched an email to the applicant regarding his request for promotion reconsideration and informed him that his request could not be granted because a Promotion Board Panel viewed the document he claimed was missing from his Promotion Board File (PBF). Officials at HRC also attached a copy of his PBF and informed him that documents 28 and 29 were the documents in question. The OER in question was a report rendered when he was serving in the rank of captain.
3. In the processing of this case, on 21 March 2013, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the HRC Officer Promotions Branch. The advisory official opined that a review of the applicant's official record shows the OER in question was available for review by the selection board and verified through the Department of the Army Secretariat that the contested OER was seen by the promotion selection board in its entirety.
4. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for information and to allow him the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal. He did not respond.
5. Army Regulation 600-8-29 (Officer Promotions) provides that officers who discover material error existed in their file at the time they were non-selected for promotion may request reconsideration by an SSB. Reconsideration will normally not be granted when the error is minor or when the officer, by exercising reasonable care, could have detected and corrected the error in the Officer Record Brief (ORB) or Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), formerly known as the Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). It is the officer's responsibility to review his ORB and AMHRR before the board convenes and to notify the board in writing of possible administrative deficiencies in them.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicantÂ’s contentions and supporting documents have been noted and appear to lack merit.
2. While the applicant disagrees with the language used by HRC in denying his request for an SSB to the rank of colonel, the bottom line in this case is that there is insufficient evidence to support his contention that the FY2011 JAG Colonel Promotion Selection Board did not review the OER in question in its entirety.
3. Officials at HRC have verified that the OER in question was present for review and was reviewed by the promotion selection board and the applicant has not presented sufficient evidence to overcome their verification.
4. Therefore, in the absence of sufficient evidence to show otherwise, there appears to be no error or injustice in this case to warrant correction of his records.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____X____ ___X_____ ___X_____ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
___________X____________
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130003351
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130003351
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017269
The applicant requests removal of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Colonel (COL) Army Promotion List (APL) non-select letter from her Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), correction of the date of rank (DOR) and effective date of her promotion to the rank/grade of COL/O-6, correction of her mandatory retirement date (MRD) to 1 July 2017, and attendance at the Army War College in July 2014. g. The Army regulations provide that a special selection board (SSB) will not be convened to consider...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013215
The file contained a memorandum for record (MFR) relating to a successful Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) appeal of an Officer Evaluation Report (OER) as a first lieutenant (1LT). She provides: * A self-authored statement * An IG letter, dated 2 July 2013 * Numerous email * Memorandum, Subject: SSB Validation Panel Results FY12, LTC Army OS, dated 10 December 2012 * Promotion board files for FY11, FY12, and FY13 * Officer Record Brief (ORB) CONSIDERATION OF...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110025012
He states his non-selection for promotion to LTC was based on the Army failing to account for his prior active duty service with the Coast Guard on his Officer Record Brief (ORB). c. He further stated that the decision to recommend an officer for promotion was based on the selection board's collective judgment as to the relative merit of an officer's overall record when compared to the records of other officers being considered. The applicant has provided no evidence nor did he state in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001877
The applicant requests: * removal of one DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report (OER)) for the period 12 June 2006 through 20 January 2007 from his official military personnel file (OMPF) * promotion reconsideration for lieutenant colonel (LTC) by a special selection board (SSB) 2. He is requesting reconsideration for promotion to LTC based on the promotion board having viewed his file with two OER's for the same rating period. Army Regulation 600-8-29 (Officer Promotions), chapter 7,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009996
The applicant states that he submitted a request for an SSB to address material omissions and errors in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) as it appeared before the 12 August 2008 promotion board. Any memorandum considered by a promotion board will become a matter of record to be maintained with the records of the board. It is also noted that the applicant's OER with an end date of 4 June 2007 has been identified as having one "minor negative discrepancy" (i.e., an "X"...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007901
HRC considered the applicant's contentions and evidence and also reviewed his ORB and board file. The SA's instructions to the president and board members of the FY 2012, LTC, JAGC, PSB clearly show he stated that DA Memo 600-2, dated 25 September 2006, and/or DODI 1320.14, dated 24 September 1996, provide administrative procedures, oath for selection board members, general requirements, guidance concerning the conduct of the selection board and disclosure of information, information to be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005812
In support of his request, the applicant provides the following documents: a. email messages (from March 2013) between the applicant and an official in Officer Promotions, HRC, that show: * the applicant inquired about his eligibility for promotion to LTC in the USAR * he was advised the FY08 Active Duty List (ADL) Board would have considered him had he still been in the USAR * he inquired when he would have been considered for promotion to LTC in the RA * he was advised the FY08 PSB would...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009665
The applicant requests his records be considered for promotion to colonel (COL) by a special selection board (SSB). He was considered by the FY12 COL, JAGC Department of the Army Promotion Selection Board, which convened on 17-18 July 2012, but he was not selected for promotion. (3) The board that considered an officer from in or above the promotion zone did not have before it some material information (SSB discretionary).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005265
The applicant requests correction of his records to show he received a DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report (OER)) for the period covering 14 April through 27 June 2011 or issuance of a letter explaining his situation [missing OER] be added to his promotion packet before a Special Selection Board (SSB). He provides: * Memorandum, Subject: Request for OER and SSB Board, dated 18 December 2012 * Memorandum, Subject: FY12 LTC AGR JA Promotion Selection Board, dated 13 December 2012 *...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018878.
The applicant requests reconsideration for promotion to major (MAJ)/O-4, Judge Advocate General's Corp (JAGC) by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for a missing DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report (OER)) for the rating period 1 January 2011 through 31 December 2011 (hereafter referred to as the contested OER). The applicant provided a memorandum from his senior rater to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), dated 10 August 2012, requesting that an SSB for reconsideration of the...